Tudhope v. Riehle

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that separate action complaining of fraudulent inducement to enter settlement agreement in a prior divorce was barred by res judicata
• noting that motion for relief from judgment in family court is proper avenue of relief for challenging separation agreement that was incorporated into final divorce order
• explaining that collateral attack on divorce order incorporating parties’ settlement agreement was not permissible merely because one-year period for Rule 60(b)(1
• reiterating that “a civil action in tort is fundamentally different from a divorce proceeding, and that the respective issues involved are entirely distinct” (citation omitted)
• upholding dismissal of wife’s damages complaint, alleging fraud and uncon-scionability, as “nothing more than a collateral attack on the divorce judgment”
• collateral attacks on validity of divorce order and settlement agreement incorporated therein are barred under principles of res judicata

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).